No doubt, having these fabs is an important advantage. How they leverage them is another matter entirely. There is opportunity everywhere, iin everything Intel is trying. They may be able to recoveer from the blunder involving Apple over the next couple fo years but that won't happen without leveraging the foundries and other capacities.

No doubt, having these fabs is an important advantage. How they leverage them is another matter entirely. There is opportunity everywhere, iin everything Intel is trying. They may be able to recoveer from the blunder involving Apple over the next couple fo years but that won't happen without leveraging the foundries and other capacities.

No doubt, having these fabs is an important advantage. How they leverage them is another matter entirely. There is opportunity everywhere, iin everything Intel is trying. They may be able to recoveer from the blunder involving Apple over the next couple fo years but that won't happen without leveraging the foundries and other capacities.

No doubt, having these fabs is an important advantage. How they leverage them is another matter entirely. There is opportunity everywhere, iin everything Intel is trying. They may be able to recoveer from the blunder involving Apple over the next couple fo years but that won't happen without leveraging the foundries and other capacities.

Intel did push hard for a long time....but according Paul O "At the end of the day, there was a chip that they(Apple) were interested in that they wanted to pay a certain price for and not a nickel more and that price was below our forecasted cost." And the rest is history....

As for the FAB situation....it is a smart move I will admit. But now it's not just the superiority of ones technology but who has the deeper pocket and cheaper price per dice / wafer. Besides, TSMC has good relationships with it's customers....the question is.....can Intel provide a "value proposition" to these same customers that they won't hesitate to move to Intel FABS?

1) Go into building ARM processors again. One reason why XSCALE failed was it was a solution before it's time. NOW, the ecosystem exist that requires better ARM processors . Intel can use thier superior FAB process to compete against other FABS. Of course, the price would not be similar to X86 profit margins but at least they should stay afloat. Atom could still be a contender on high end tablets....

2) Forge ahead with mastering 3D IC technology specific for mobile based devices. Squeezing more IC's to conserve board real estate could make them attractive to phone and tablet manufacturers. Could also buy them more time to delay Moore's law.

3) A difficult one is to proceed on offloading most of the Intel devices from in-house assembly to subcons. Assembly subcons are so flexible and resillient to change and customer market requirements. A skill that Intel cannot take up immediately...

It really bothers me to see unhealthy collusion, e.g. hardware vendors getting in bed with content owners or even service providers. In the work I do, if we were caught doing such shenanigans, we'd be facing prison time. There's no reason on earth for a hardware vendor such as Intel to have to beg content owners for anything.

Verizon ought to get into distributing TV using Internet Protocols, although I have to wonder what all the fuss is about, since I already use Verizon Broadband to watch practically all of my TV programs. I'll assume these new schemes involve primarily the delivery and charging for MVPD by-subscription-only tiers, using IP.

Since the TV networks, i.e. the content OWNERS, are so paranoid about their by-subscription stuff going out over IP, one wonders why they don't bypass these middlemen and deliver the stuff from their own web portals. Honestly guys, how slow can you be to miss the fact that people want to consume their TV using Internet appliances? It's high time that the TV networks get into the act, instead of desperately attempting to forestall the inevitable. TV over IP is entirely feasible, both ad-supported and by subscription.

You need to remember that this is not just about a consumer device and content, it was also about building the infrastructure to support it. I would venture to say that the data center assests and supporting software were a key reason for the acquisition by Verizon.

Intel failed with WiMAX and MEEGO, but I think you'd agree that PCIe and WiFi did amazingly well.

People complain about the failures but take the successes for granted. But I remember back when Intel was making WiFi a requirement for portables in order to get the Intel branding, and everyone thought they were really stretching things.

Also, aren't they getting some big customers for their foundry business? Considering the cost of foundries, they may not be able to build new ones without some sharing of costs.